South African Covid-19 News and Discussions 3

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
23,324
Funny because i have just read about how you want to rush through with the treatment of ivermectin. Plenty of shortcuts taken with many outstanding questions.
Precisely! By Jove you have got it!
Okay to rush things provided the establishment approves, not okay if the establishment does not.
 

Unhappy438

Honorary Master
Joined
May 25, 2011
Messages
21,965
Precisely! By Jove you have got it!
Okay to rush things provided the establishment approves, not okay if the establishment does not.

Same with you. Somewhat hypocritical. At least stick to your principles ;)
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
23,324
Same with you. Somewhat hypocritical. At least stick to your principles ;)
The difference is I am sticking to my principles, just pointing out the hypocracy.
Not advocating no one gets the jab, just suggesting if the jab is allowed then so should IVM be.
 
Last edited:

Lupus

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 25, 2006
Messages
35,836
People are still commenting that it is a massacre and carnage for this, it's like guys carnage is not what this is. Also numbers seem to be confusing people. 3% CFR means 3% of all people confirmed died.
So if you tested 100 people and 20 of those were positive, that means 0.6 of those who went in for the test will die. It does not mean that this has a 3% mortality rate.
 

Paulsie

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2020
Messages
2,480
This is dead, dead wrong. Please do some research before proliferating this stuff.

Here: https://www.nebraskamed.com/COVID/were-the-covid-19-vaccines-rushed

...specifically point 5 "Overlapping phases" you're simply failing to understand how a project can be managed in more than one way, especially if there is a huge amount of funding available that no one minds burning.

NYT has a great Gantt chart illustrating this:
View attachment 1092249


Can you elaborate on the 'many questions outstanding' perhaps?
Not to nitpick, but your graphic shows as follows:
- clinical trials started before academic research was completed
- Factories were being built while the research had barely even started
- production started before the first phase of trials was completed
- approvals started before the 3rd phase was completed

That's what overlaying means. What could possibly go wrong??

Edit: in engineering, construction etc, these overlaying phases are commonly used. It serves to spread work independent of each other, so that they all come together in the end at the right time. How approvals can run independent of trials, that I fail to see.

You cannot run vaccine development and approvals separate and then put the two together in the end and say "here's an approved vaccine".

Or hold on a second...
.
 
Last edited:

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
23,324
Not to nitpick, nut your graphic shows as follows:
- clinical trials started before academic research was completed
- Factories were being built while the research had barely even started
- production started before the first phase of trials was completed
- approvals started before the 3rd phase was completed

That's what overlaying means. What could possibly go wrong??
Kusile.
The power station construction started BEFORE the design was finished and finalised! We know how well that went.
Need more examples?
 

R13...

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2008
Messages
38,635
The mayor has covid and he had the vaccine.
Vaccine doesn't stop infection.
But is he vaccinated? I remember him giving it a pass on the reason that healthcare workers must get first.
 

Craig_

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 22, 2016
Messages
23,673
Vaccine doesn't stop infection.
But is he vaccinated? I remember him giving it a pass on the reason that healthcare workers must get first.

I'm a bit uninformed on this subject, but what is the purpose of the vaccine if it doesn't stop infections? For the first time time now since the second wave quite a few people around me are positive again, only one is sick and no one has died yet so far, unlike in wave 2 where I knew of quite a few people that died. So this wave seems to be less deadly?
 

Lupus

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 25, 2006
Messages
35,836
I'm a bit uninformed on this subject, but what is the purpose of the vaccine if it doesn't stop infections? For the first time time now since the second wave quite a few people around me are positive again, only one is sick and no one has died yet so far, unlike in wave 2 where I knew of quite a few people that died. So this wave seems to be less deadly?
Currently daily deaths are still pretty much lower then even wave 1s.
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
23,324
I'm a bit uninformed on this subject, but what is the purpose of the vaccine if it doesn't stop infections? For the first time time now since the second wave quite a few people around me are positive again, only one is sick and no one has died yet so far, unlike in wave 2 where I knew of quite a few people that died. So this wave seems to be less deadly?
1. They are designed to prevent sickness and death.
2. They are designed to make big pharma rich.

The experts tell us the new variants are always more infectious but generally less deadly.
Cynics amongst us suggest that big pharma does not want this virus and its variants to dissapear anytime soon anyway.
 

Gordon_R

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
18,075
I'm a bit uninformed on this subject, but what is the purpose of the vaccine if it doesn't stop infections? For the first time time now since the second wave quite a few people around me are positive again, only one is sick and no one has died yet so far, unlike in wave 2 where I knew of quite a few people that died. So this wave seems to be less deadly?

Vaccines:
1. Reduce the probability of infections (60-80%).
2. Significantly reduce the chances of severe symptoms or death (90-95%).
 

SlinkyMike

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2006
Messages
8,309
Not to nitpick, but your graphic shows as follows:
- clinical trials started before academic research was completed
- Factories were being built while the research had barely even started
- production started before the first phase of trials was completed
- approvals started before the 3rd phase was completed

That's what overlaying means. What could possibly go wrong??

Edit: in engineering, construction etc, these overlaying phases are commonly used. It serves to spread work independent of each other, so that they all come together in the end at the right time. How approvals can run independent of trials, that I fail to see.

You cannot run vaccine development and approvals separate and then put the two together in the end and say "here's an approved vaccine".

Or hold on a second...
.

Kusile.
The power station construction started BEFORE the design was finished and finalised! We know how well that went.
Need more examples?
OK guys my mistake.
Pfizer and Moderna should clearly have consulted with the brain trust over here before embarking on this multi billion dollar project but now it's too late and humanity is doomed.
I mean they took so many chances who knows what mutations this 'science' gobbledygook will result in.
See you in the future with all three of my eyes.
 

VicB

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2016
Messages
142
OK guys my mistake.
Pfizer and Moderna should clearly have consulted with the brain trust over here before embarking on this multi billion dollar project but now it's too late and humanity is doomed.
I mean they took so many chances who knows what mutations this 'science' gobbledygook will result in.
See you in the future with all three of my eyes.
It boggles the mind as to the amount of "experts" in this thread and their behaviour. From what I have read, there are some people in the medical, pharmaceutical & engineering fields here, and they keep correcting these "experts" when they keep stating their personal opinions as scientific fact, to hopefully stem the amount of disinformation and falsehoods being thrown around. And yet, people will still argue their own position despite being shown the correct info. SMH
 

SlinkyMike

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2006
Messages
8,309
It boggles the mind as to the amount of "experts" in this thread and their behaviour. From what I have read, there are some people in the medical, pharmaceutical & engineering fields here, and they keep correcting these "experts" when they keep stating their personal opinions as scientific fact, to hopefully stem the amount of disinformation and falsehoods being thrown around. And yet, people will still argue their own position despite being shown the correct info. SMH
People don't argue in order to learn something. They aren't asking questions or making a point, they are crying (publicly) because they know they are wrong and they are too full of kak to admit it.
 

VicB

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2016
Messages
142
Not to nitpick, but your graphic shows as follows:
- clinical trials started before academic research was completed
- Factories were being built while the research had barely even started
- production started before the first phase of trials was completed
- approvals started before the 3rd phase was completed

That's what overlaying means. What could possibly go wrong??

Edit: in engineering, construction etc, these overlaying phases are commonly used. It serves to spread work independent of each other, so that they all come together in the end at the right time. How approvals can run independent of trials, that I fail to see.

You cannot run vaccine development and approvals separate and then put the two together in the end and say "here's an approved vaccine".

Or hold on a second...
.
The above overlaying of phases would normally not happen during drug development to this extent, but it is also not unheard of. By doing this, you would reduce your timelines drastically, as is what was needed in this case.

To get a new drug approved, every step and component of the manufacturing, packing & distribution is part of the approval process. Every room, every mixer, every machine, every vial, EVERYTHING is documented and included in the drug dossier that get's submitted to the FDA and other regulatory bodies. All the factories of all the different constituents of a new drug and all their details are included (a drug contains not just the active ingredient, but also soluents, colourants, preservatives, binding agents, etc). A drug dossier for a new approval is often contained in enough documents to fill a small room.

Point being, as every step and every part of the manufacturing process and it's components are also part of the approval, you cannot submit your dossier for approval before those steps and facilities are completed to be included in the dossier for submission. Hence why Pfizer and other companies took the risk of starting to prepare their facilities for manufacture of the vaccine, and once done to start ramping up production of the vaccine before final approvals were given.

You cannot run vaccine development and approvals separate and then put the two together in the end and say "here's an approved vaccine".
Well, yes you can actually. How do you think the vaccine used for the phase III trials are acquired? Experimental drug candidates in development are listed, documented and the research process documented to ensure compliance with international standards. The phased trial design is also documented and reviewed by the FDA and other ethical bodies to ensure that the design of the phase III and other phases are ethically and clinically up to standard. Sometimes you submit your phase III trial data and it get's accepted by the FDA after review, other times the FDA ask you for additional data, or recommends / requires some changes in the manufacturing process, which the company will then have to go back and make the necessary changes. Pharma companies don't go to the FDA and surprise them with a finished product and ask them to approve it. There's many other approval steps and involvement from regulatory bodies during development.

That's what overlaying means. What could possibly go wrong??
Well, nothing in terms of the quality of the drug. The approval process is extremely rigid in terms of it's requirements. If any of those requirements are deviated from, the application is rejected and some recommendations are made as to how to fix it.
But what can go wrong is delays, and cost implications. If you manufacture drug before final approval, you run the risk of having to destroy all your manufactured batches if the FDA requires a change in the drug or manufacturing process. It's a very big risk to the company, but not to the patient. In this case, it's a risk that Pfizer was willing to take as they were very confident of the quality of the drug they developed.
 
Top